Bishop Romney and the high holy church of flip floppery.

[Sallow]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBOqLxzGTx8]Mitt Romney - I Like Firing People - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqSrpynRTlk]The Poor People - Mitt Romney on CNN: Starting Point /w Soledad O'Brien - February 1, 2012 - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2h8ujX6T0A]Mitt Romney- Corporations Are People! - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Sallow]

But lets get back to the OP.

First the good Bishop says he wouldn't violate Pakistani sovereignty to get Bin Laden, and that the cost was to high.

Then he gets mad about Obama "taking credit".

Then he implicitly takes credit on the anniversary of Bin Laden's death.

Outstanding man..outstanding.

 

[Jarhead]

Which company would that be?

Romney was a corporate raider.

That's in my own words.

In other words you have no idea whaty Bain capital does and did when Romney was at the helm.

Not surprised.

But then again, you are the one who calkled me a racist becuase I have conservative values.....so I am not surpirsed that you are so naive.

This is the second or third time you've made this claim with nothing to back it up.

And I have every idea what Bain Capital did and does.

It used other people's money to broker either buying and disassembling companies or re-structuring them. Generally at the cost of jobs to Americans.

You said in a post that conservatives dont like Obama becuase of his skin color. I am a conservatiive. I take offense to that comment.

You dont know what Bain capital does...so here is an overview....

Bain would interact with 3 different industries..

1) Business Brokers
2) Bankruptcy Attorney's
3) Lending Institutions

Poeple of the above industries would approach Bain Capital with businesses that were ripe for restructuring..

Now...why those three industries?

1) Business brokers.....they are aware of companies that are on the market to be sold
2) Bankruptcy attorney's....they are aware of what business owners are considering bankruptcy where court allowed restructuring (chapter 11) is not an option
3) Lending institutions....they are aware of what companies are in debt and not showing signs of elimninating the debt.

Bain would take these "proispects" and analyze them to find out the following:

1) Is it a failed business model or a failure of management
2) Does it have a solid infrastructure and a product/service that is vaible
3) Does it have assets where, if turnaround is not possible, such assets can be sold minimizing the losses to the lending institutions and minimizing the risk to the Bain investors.

Then Bain would opt to buy a company that they believe they can turn around or, if not able to , sell off the assets.

In many cases, Bain saved the company from failure SAVING ALL OR MOST of the jobs...and in some cases, increasing the headcount over time

Bear in mind, those jobs were lost if Bain did not intervene

In some cases, Bain realized that the only way to save the company was to outsource jobs...some overseas and some to domestic outsource companies such as Forrest Edwards of NYC.....

And then, of course, Bain would find that regardless of the new business model or management, a company was too much in the red to save, so they would close the doors and sell the assets...again, something that would have taken place with or without Bain.

So I dont know where you get the right to say what Bain does....becuase nowhere is there anything in what they do that can be mniscontrued as capitalizing on the loss of jobs of the empoloyees.

BTW.....a company is sold for 2 primary reasons...

1) It is profitable and the ownership wants to cash in...and sells it for a multiple....usually a 5 to 7 times multiple.

2) It is bleeding beyond control and the ownership wants to cash out befiore he or she loses everything.

Now...as for item 1.......why would someone buy a company for 5 to 7 times multiple just so they can close the doors and selll off the assets?

As for item 2.....the company was on the verge of going under...so any purchase of it is better than doing nothing at all.

And yes...I know what I am talking about...you dont have to believe me....but what you said about Bain? It makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Jarhead]

Baldwin and Sheen are so much less sleazy then the good Bishop.

Oh..and by sleazy I mean..the good Bishop has RUINED people's lives. And for personal profit. Sleazy and ruthless. Good stuff there.

Please tell me...in your own words...how a man who took a company who was about to close its doors....and attempted to rebuild that company....ruined peioples lives.

Go ahead...in your own words.

Right...'cause that's what VULTURE capitalists do. Puhlease. He bought companies, loaded them up with debt, destroyed workers pensions then sold off the pieces of the company that were left. Think Richard Gere in Pretty Woman before his "come to Jesus" moment. (and who wouldn't have one after ******* Julia Roberts for a week)

To be fair, Willard's companies were REALLY good to other countries...since that is where they shipped all their jobs.

Ode to the King of Flip Flop...

Etchy-Sketchy Wishy-Washy Flippy-Floppy Mittens Romney

Edumucate yourself...see my post #23......

 

[Oldstyle]

So basically you've gone to a web site that went through Mitt Romney's old quotes looking to take whatever they can that could be construed as a "flip flop" usually by taking the quote completely out of context...and then come here to start this silly thread?

Gee, Sallow...wonder how Barry would fare if someone was to do the same thing with his quotes, promises and positions over the past ten years? The truth is...Barack Obama's gone back on his word so many times and changed position so many times in the short period he's been President that he makes Mitt Romney look like a rank amateur.

 

[Zander]

I can only hope that Obama continues to "spike the football" right up to election day...it is the best thing to happen for Romney since the start of the campaign!! Go "Forward" Obama!!

 

[Jarhead]

So basically you've gone to a web site that went through Mitt Romney's old quotes looking to take whatever they can that could be construed as a "flip flop" usually by taking the quote completely out of context...and then come here to start this silly thread?

Gee, Sallow...wonder how Barry would fare if someone was to do the same thing with his quotes, promises and positions over the past ten years? The truth is...Barack Obama's gone back on his word so many times and changed position so many times in the short period he's been President that he makes Mitt Romney look like a rank amateur.

Sallow also seems to believe that a business owner would sell a very successful company to Bain for an amount that was so little that it made sense to sell the assets as opposed to reap in the profits....

or....

The company was doing so poorly that Bain bought it so THEY can have thye pleasure of selling off thew assets...

Unless...of course....he can explain to us why Bain would spend money successful companies just so they can shut them down.

But then again, the guy believes that conservatives hate Obama becuase of his skin color.....nothing about policies or ideology.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

Sallow, the first two quotes that you offer from Romney were not complete. You need to go and get the questions he was asked AND his entire response and post them. CNN had both of them last night WITH the questions and the full response. That changed the entire thing and despite what the incomplete quotes looked like, it was a good response. Wolf Blitzer even remarked that what Romney said didn't seem off base and was well thought out. And I question Wolf's genetic makeup at times.

Here's the issue I've got with Barry and his boys politicizing the OBL thing. Yes, he ordered the 'hit'. It was a good thing and it took political guts. I give him credit for doing a very hard thing. And it was, there is no doubt about it. It was a very presidential thing to do and he did it. From what I hear, he may have even went out on a limb to do it. Good job Mr. President.

But I remember when the left just screamed and hollered about the "dredging" up of 9/11. And as a veteran, I understand the President's risk in ordering the operation, but folks, it wasn't the President or his national security team that was in those helicopters flying over Pakistan at 2:00am in the morning. It wasn't Hillary who rode that damaged helicopter down into the compound and instantly changed the op plan on the fly. You want to beat the drums on this thing? Your heros are the members of Seal Team 6. Not some politician sitting in an air conditioned room in Washington. You wanted the job, you got it. Cowboy up dude and give the proper credit to the proper people. It was those intelligence analysts who for 10 years worked every little tidbit of information until they pinpointed where that candidate for retroactive abortion was. It was the pilots of those helicopters who used night vision goggles to fly those two hours into country they've never been before (with night vision goggles you lose your depth perception and flying is really very dangerous). It was the pilots of those F-15's who flew CAP inside Afghanistan trying to cover their escape. You got your heros... they wear the uniform of this country.

That's my issue...

 

[Oldstyle]

"FORWARD!" That's the Obama slogan for 2012?

Gee, and I thought "Hope & Change" was vague...

I guess "Yes, We Can!" was out of the question since Barry's spent much of the last two years making excuses as to "Why We Couldn't!" and using it again would prompt snickers and loud "guffaws".

 

[Avatar4321]

Well from the man who said this:



To this:
The decision to go after bin Laden is now a part of the 2... - YouTube

Alec Baldwin on GOP:



He had nothing to do with the decision to kill Bin Laden. Indeed he was against it. However after criticizing the President for bringing this up..Romney goes to NYC on the anniversary of the death of Bin Laden..stands with Rudy Giuliani and goes to the 9/11 fire house.

Classy.

You just quoted Alec Baldwin? Really? Like that idiot's opinion counts because...he's not a fat, stupid blowhard who beats his women and gets tossed off planes for being such a complete arse? Who are you gonna quote next...Charlie Sheen?

Baldwin and Sheen are so much less sleazy then the good Bishop.

Oh..and by sleazy I mean..the good Bishop has RUINED people's lives. And for personal profit. Sleazy and ruthless. Good stuff there.

Can you name a single person whose life has been ruined by Mitt Romney? And no JoeB doesnt count as mitt only ruins his life by existing.

 

[Sallow]

In other words you have no idea whaty Bain capital does and did when Romney was at the helm.

Not surprised.

But then again, you are the one who calkled me a racist becuase I have conservative values.....so I am not surpirsed that you are so naive.

This is the second or third time you've made this claim with nothing to back it up.

And I have every idea what Bain Capital did and does.

It used other people's money to broker either buying and disassembling companies or re-structuring them. Generally at the cost of jobs to Americans.

You said in a post that conservatives dont like Obama becuase of his skin color. I am a conservatiive. I take offense to that comment.

You dont know what Bain capital does...so here is an overview....

Bain would interact with 3 different industries..

1) Business Brokers
2) Bankruptcy Attorney's
3) Lending Institutions

Poeple of the above industries would approach Bain Capital with businesses that were ripe for restructuring..

Now...why those three industries?

1) Business brokers.....they are aware of companies that are on the market to be sold
2) Bankruptcy attorney's....they are aware of what business owners are considering bankruptcy where court allowed restructuring (chapter 11) is not an option
3) Lending institutions....they are aware of what companies are in debt and not showing signs of elimninating the debt.

Bain would take these "proispects" and analyze them to find out the following:

1) Is it a failed business model or a failure of management
2) Does it have a solid infrastructure and a product/service that is vaible
3) Does it have assets where, if turnaround is not possible, such assets can be sold minimizing the losses to the lending institutions and minimizing the risk to the Bain investors.

Then Bain would opt to buy a company that they believe they can turn around or, if not able to , sell off the assets.

In many cases, Bain saved the company from failure SAVING ALL OR MOST of the jobs...and in some cases, increasing the headcount over time

Bear in mind, those jobs were lost if Bain did not intervene

In some cases, Bain realized that the only way to save the company was to outsource jobs...some overseas and some to domestic outsource companies such as Forrest Edwards of NYC.....

And then, of course, Bain would find that regardless of the new business model or management, a company was too much in the red to save, so they would close the doors and sell the assets...again, something that would have taken place with or without Bain.

So I dont know where you get the right to say what Bain does....becuase nowhere is there anything in what they do that can be mniscontrued as capitalizing on the loss of jobs of the empoloyees.

BTW.....a company is sold for 2 primary reasons...

1) It is profitable and the ownership wants to cash in...and sells it for a multiple....usually a 5 to 7 times multiple.

2) It is bleeding beyond control and the ownership wants to cash out befiore he or she loses everything.

Now...as for item 1.......why would someone buy a company for 5 to 7 times multiple just so they can close the doors and selll off the assets?

As for item 2.....the company was on the verge of going under...so any purchase of it is better than doing nothing at all.

And yes...I know what I am talking about...you dont have to believe me....but what you said about Bain? It makes absolutely no sense.

Dude..first off..I've posted a good many conservatives dislike Obama because of his skin color..not "all". If that's not your reason for not liking..and I am reasonably sure it's not..then my statement never pertained to you.

Second off..I am fully aware of what Bain Capital did and does..even with you sugar coating. And it's not entirely accurate. Most people that got involved with Bain were looking to "maximize" profits..whether or not a company was "healthy".

 

[Oldstyle]

So basically you've gone to a web site that went through Mitt Romney's old quotes looking to take whatever they can that could be construed as a "flip flop" usually by taking the quote completely out of context...and then come here to start this silly thread?

Gee, Sallow...wonder how Barry would fare if someone was to do the same thing with his quotes, promises and positions over the past ten years? The truth is...Barack Obama's gone back on his word so many times and changed position so many times in the short period he's been President that he makes Mitt Romney look like a rank amateur.

Sallow also seems to believe that a business owner would sell a very successful company to Bain for an amount that was so little that it made sense to sell the assets as opposed to reap in the profits....

or....

The company was doing so poorly that Bain bought it so THEY can have thye pleasure of selling off thew assets...

Unless...of course....he can explain to us why Bain would spend money successful companies just so they can shut them down.

But then again, the guy believes that conservatives hate Obama becuase of his skin color.....nothing about policies or ideology.

Sallow's not the brightest "bulb" on the progressive tree. In another thread he stated that Al Queda wasn't a threat to the US until we invaded Iraq. The sheer stupidity involved in coming up with THAT statement boggles my mind. Does the idiot really not know that we went into Iraq years after 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan? Gee, guys flying loaded passenger jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon doesn't constitute a "threat" in Sallow's pea sized cranium? Even Deanie's not THAT dumb.

 

[Sallow]

So basically you've gone to a web site that went through Mitt Romney's old quotes looking to take whatever they can that could be construed as a "flip flop" usually by taking the quote completely out of context...and then come here to start this silly thread?

Gee, Sallow...wonder how Barry would fare if someone was to do the same thing with his quotes, promises and positions over the past ten years? The truth is...Barack Obama's gone back on his word so many times and changed position so many times in the short period he's been President that he makes Mitt Romney look like a rank amateur.

"Old" quotes? These quotes were made back in 2007 and 2008. And the videos I posted came from this year.

You guys made a stink over ONE Kerry flip flop while calling his service in Vietnam cowardly and mocking his war injuries.

Seriously..after that..you should get over yourselves.

 

[Sallow]

So basically you've gone to a web site that went through Mitt Romney's old quotes looking to take whatever they can that could be construed as a "flip flop" usually by taking the quote completely out of context...and then come here to start this silly thread?

Gee, Sallow...wonder how Barry would fare if someone was to do the same thing with his quotes, promises and positions over the past ten years? The truth is...Barack Obama's gone back on his word so many times and changed position so many times in the short period he's been President that he makes Mitt Romney look like a rank amateur.

Sallow also seems to believe that a business owner would sell a very successful company to Bain for an amount that was so little that it made sense to sell the assets as opposed to reap in the profits....

or....

The company was doing so poorly that Bain bought it so THEY can have thye pleasure of selling off thew assets...

Unless...of course....he can explain to us why Bain would spend money successful companies just so they can shut them down.

But then again, the guy believes that conservatives hate Obama becuase of his skin color.....nothing about policies or ideology.

Sallow's not the brightest "bulb" on the progressive tree. In another thread he stated that Al Queda wasn't a threat to the US until we invaded Iraq. The sheer stupidity involved in coming up with THAT statement boggles my mind. Does the idiot really not know that we went into Iraq years after 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan? Gee, guys flying loaded passenger jets into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon doesn't constitute a "threat" in Sallow's pea sized cranium? Even Deanie's not THAT dumb.

Bullshit.

Link that quote.

 

[Jarhead]

This is the second or third time you've made this claim with nothing to back it up.

And I have every idea what Bain Capital did and does.

It used other people's money to broker either buying and disassembling companies or re-structuring them. Generally at the cost of jobs to Americans.

You said in a post that conservatives dont like Obama becuase of his skin color. I am a conservatiive. I take offense to that comment.

You dont know what Bain capital does...so here is an overview....

Bain would interact with 3 different industries..

1) Business Brokers
2) Bankruptcy Attorney's
3) Lending Institutions

Poeple of the above industries would approach Bain Capital with businesses that were ripe for restructuring..

Now...why those three industries?

1) Business brokers.....they are aware of companies that are on the market to be sold
2) Bankruptcy attorney's....they are aware of what business owners are considering bankruptcy where court allowed restructuring (chapter 11) is not an option
3) Lending institutions....they are aware of what companies are in debt and not showing signs of elimninating the debt.

Bain would take these "proispects" and analyze them to find out the following:

1) Is it a failed business model or a failure of management
2) Does it have a solid infrastructure and a product/service that is vaible
3) Does it have assets where, if turnaround is not possible, such assets can be sold minimizing the losses to the lending institutions and minimizing the risk to the Bain investors.

Then Bain would opt to buy a company that they believe they can turn around or, if not able to , sell off the assets.

In many cases, Bain saved the company from failure SAVING ALL OR MOST of the jobs...and in some cases, increasing the headcount over time

Bear in mind, those jobs were lost if Bain did not intervene

In some cases, Bain realized that the only way to save the company was to outsource jobs...some overseas and some to domestic outsource companies such as Forrest Edwards of NYC.....

And then, of course, Bain would find that regardless of the new business model or management, a company was too much in the red to save, so they would close the doors and sell the assets...again, something that would have taken place with or without Bain.

So I dont know where you get the right to say what Bain does....becuase nowhere is there anything in what they do that can be mniscontrued as capitalizing on the loss of jobs of the empoloyees.

BTW.....a company is sold for 2 primary reasons...

1) It is profitable and the ownership wants to cash in...and sells it for a multiple....usually a 5 to 7 times multiple.

2) It is bleeding beyond control and the ownership wants to cash out befiore he or she loses everything.

Now...as for item 1.......why would someone buy a company for 5 to 7 times multiple just so they can close the doors and selll off the assets?

As for item 2.....the company was on the verge of going under...so any purchase of it is better than doing nothing at all.

And yes...I know what I am talking about...you dont have to believe me....but what you said about Bain? It makes absolutely no sense.

Dude..first off..I've posted a good many conservatives dislike Obama because of his skin color..not "all". If that's not your reason for not liking..and I am reasonably sure it's not..then my statement never pertained to you.

Second off..I am fully aware of what Bain Capital did and does..even with you sugar coating. And it's not entirely accurate. Most people that got involved with Bain were looking to "maximize" profits..whether or not a company was "healthy".

yo...."dude"....generalizing and saying "most" is sad in itself. Now, If Obama had more conservative policies, trhen I would understand it if cponservatives hated him anyway.

But to say MOST conservatives are against a President who is liberal becuase of his skin color is plain old childish.....

As for Bain...

Please explain to me why a "healthy" company would be taken apart...for a Healthy company is bought for 5-7 times multiple...and NO WAY would assets equal or exceed 5-7times multiple..

You see, there is absolutely NO LOGIC in the idea that they took apart healthy companies for profit....and the only ones that can say that are those that do not understand things such as....well....what 5-7 times multiple means.

Bottom line....a healthy company is sold for many times its core value....MANY TIMES..

so to take it apart to sell it for its assets...ITS CORE VALUE....is rediculous and a losing proposition.

NO ONE WOULD DO IT!

 

[Sallow]

You said in a post that conservatives dont like Obama becuase of his skin color. I am a conservatiive. I take offense to that comment.

You dont know what Bain capital does...so here is an overview....

Bain would interact with 3 different industries..

1) Business Brokers
2) Bankruptcy Attorney's
3) Lending Institutions

Poeple of the above industries would approach Bain Capital with businesses that were ripe for restructuring..

Now...why those three industries?

1) Business brokers.....they are aware of companies that are on the market to be sold
2) Bankruptcy attorney's....they are aware of what business owners are considering bankruptcy where court allowed restructuring (chapter 11) is not an option
3) Lending institutions....they are aware of what companies are in debt and not showing signs of elimninating the debt.

Bain would take these "proispects" and analyze them to find out the following:

1) Is it a failed business model or a failure of management
2) Does it have a solid infrastructure and a product/service that is vaible
3) Does it have assets where, if turnaround is not possible, such assets can be sold minimizing the losses to the lending institutions and minimizing the risk to the Bain investors.

Then Bain would opt to buy a company that they believe they can turn around or, if not able to , sell off the assets.

In many cases, Bain saved the company from failure SAVING ALL OR MOST of the jobs...and in some cases, increasing the headcount over time

Bear in mind, those jobs were lost if Bain did not intervene

In some cases, Bain realized that the only way to save the company was to outsource jobs...some overseas and some to domestic outsource companies such as Forrest Edwards of NYC.....

And then, of course, Bain would find that regardless of the new business model or management, a company was too much in the red to save, so they would close the doors and sell the assets...again, something that would have taken place with or without Bain.

So I dont know where you get the right to say what Bain does....becuase nowhere is there anything in what they do that can be mniscontrued as capitalizing on the loss of jobs of the empoloyees.

BTW.....a company is sold for 2 primary reasons...

1) It is profitable and the ownership wants to cash in...and sells it for a multiple....usually a 5 to 7 times multiple.

2) It is bleeding beyond control and the ownership wants to cash out befiore he or she loses everything.

Now...as for item 1.......why would someone buy a company for 5 to 7 times multiple just so they can close the doors and selll off the assets?

As for item 2.....the company was on the verge of going under...so any purchase of it is better than doing nothing at all.

And yes...I know what I am talking about...you dont have to believe me....but what you said about Bain? It makes absolutely no sense.

Dude..first off..I've posted a good many conservatives dislike Obama because of his skin color..not "all". If that's not your reason for not liking..and I am reasonably sure it's not..then my statement never pertained to you.

Second off..I am fully aware of what Bain Capital did and does..even with you sugar coating. And it's not entirely accurate. Most people that got involved with Bain were looking to "maximize" profits..whether or not a company was "healthy".

yo...."dude"....generalizing and saying "most" is sad in itself. Now, If Obama had more conservative policies, trhen I would understand it if cponservatives hated him anyway.

But to say MOST conservatives are against a President who is liberal becuase of his skin color is plain old childish.....

As for Bain...

Please explain to me why a "healthy" company would be taken apart...for a Healthy company is bought for 5-7 times multiple...and NO WAY would assets equal or exceed 5-7times multiple..

You see, there is absolutely NO LOGIC in the idea that they took apart healthy companies for profit....and the only ones that can say that are those that do not understand things such as....well....what 5-7 times multiple means.

Bottom line....a healthy company is sold for many times its core value....MANY TIMES..

so to take it apart to sell it for its assets...ITS CORE VALUE....is rediculous and a losing proposition.

NO ONE WOULD DO IT!

Again..bull.

Most of the people in the Republican field for President were either bonafide racists, bigots or both. Gingrich, Santorum, Bachmann, and Paul have time and time again shown themselves to be racist..and Cain was a bigot. You don't like the tag then your party and conservatives shouldn't be supporting these people.

And why would a healthy company be taken apart? Dunno..it happens all the time.

You tell me. But in a nutshell and off the top of my head..it's great for short term profit.

 

[Jarhead]

Dude..first off..I've posted a good many conservatives dislike Obama because of his skin color..not "all". If that's not your reason for not liking..and I am reasonably sure it's not..then my statement never pertained to you.

Second off..I am fully aware of what Bain Capital did and does..even with you sugar coating. And it's not entirely accurate. Most people that got involved with Bain were looking to "maximize" profits..whether or not a company was "healthy".

yo...."dude"....generalizing and saying "most" is sad in itself. Now, If Obama had more conservative policies, trhen I would understand it if cponservatives hated him anyway.

But to say MOST conservatives are against a President who is liberal becuase of his skin color is plain old childish.....

As for Bain...

Please explain to me why a "healthy" company would be taken apart...for a Healthy company is bought for 5-7 times multiple...and NO WAY would assets equal or exceed 5-7times multiple..

You see, there is absolutely NO LOGIC in the idea that they took apart healthy companies for profit....and the only ones that can say that are those that do not understand things such as....well....what 5-7 times multiple means.

Bottom line....a healthy company is sold for many times its core value....MANY TIMES..

so to take it apart to sell it for its assets...ITS CORE VALUE....is rediculous and a losing proposition.

NO ONE WOULD DO IT!

Again..bull.

Most of the people in the Republican field for President were either bonafide racists, bigots or both. Gingrich, Santorum, Bachmann, and Paul have time and time again shown themselves to be racist..and Cain was a bigot. You don't like the tag then your party and conservatives shouldn't be supporting these people.

And why would a healthy company be taken apart? Dunno..it happens all the time.

You tell me. But in a nutshell and off the top of my head..it's great for short term profit.

Dunno...it happens all the time...

OK....give me the example of one single company that it happened to. Cite ONE EXAMPLE of a company that had a core value of X...was soild for 5 times X...and was subsequently taken apart for sale of the assets valued at X..

Give me one example.

One.

As for the "party of racists"....

You are a ******* pathetic asshole...

 

[RDD_1210]

You said in a post that conservatives dont like Obama becuase of his skin color. I am a conservatiive. I take offense to that comment.

You dont know what Bain capital does...so here is an overview....

Bain would interact with 3 different industries..

1) Business Brokers
2) Bankruptcy Attorney's
3) Lending Institutions

Poeple of the above industries would approach Bain Capital with businesses that were ripe for restructuring..

Now...why those three industries?

1) Business brokers.....they are aware of companies that are on the market to be sold
2) Bankruptcy attorney's....they are aware of what business owners are considering bankruptcy where court allowed restructuring (chapter 11) is not an option
3) Lending institutions....they are aware of what companies are in debt and not showing signs of elimninating the debt.

Bain would take these "proispects" and analyze them to find out the following:

1) Is it a failed business model or a failure of management
2) Does it have a solid infrastructure and a product/service that is vaible
3) Does it have assets where, if turnaround is not possible, such assets can be sold minimizing the losses to the lending institutions and minimizing the risk to the Bain investors.

Then Bain would opt to buy a company that they believe they can turn around or, if not able to , sell off the assets.

In many cases, Bain saved the company from failure SAVING ALL OR MOST of the jobs...and in some cases, increasing the headcount over time

Bear in mind, those jobs were lost if Bain did not intervene

In some cases, Bain realized that the only way to save the company was to outsource jobs...some overseas and some to domestic outsource companies such as Forrest Edwards of NYC.....

And then, of course, Bain would find that regardless of the new business model or management, a company was too much in the red to save, so they would close the doors and sell the assets...again, something that would have taken place with or without Bain.

So I dont know where you get the right to say what Bain does....becuase nowhere is there anything in what they do that can be mniscontrued as capitalizing on the loss of jobs of the empoloyees.

BTW.....a company is sold for 2 primary reasons...

1) It is profitable and the ownership wants to cash in...and sells it for a multiple....usually a 5 to 7 times multiple.

2) It is bleeding beyond control and the ownership wants to cash out befiore he or she loses everything.

Now...as for item 1.......why would someone buy a company for 5 to 7 times multiple just so they can close the doors and selll off the assets?

As for item 2.....the company was on the verge of going under...so any purchase of it is better than doing nothing at all.

And yes...I know what I am talking about...you dont have to believe me....but what you said about Bain? It makes absolutely no sense.

Dude..first off..I've posted a good many conservatives dislike Obama because of his skin color..not "all". If that's not your reason for not liking..and I am reasonably sure it's not..then my statement never pertained to you.

Second off..I am fully aware of what Bain Capital did and does..even with you sugar coating. And it's not entirely accurate. Most people that got involved with Bain were looking to "maximize" profits..whether or not a company was "healthy".

yo...."dude"....generalizing and saying "most" is sad in itself. Now, If Obama had more conservative policies, trhen I would understand it if cponservatives hated him anyway.

But to say MOST conservatives are against a President who is liberal becuase of his skin color is plain old childish.....

As for Bain...

Please explain to me why a "healthy" company would be taken apart...for a Healthy company is bought for 5-7 times multiple...and NO WAY would assets equal or exceed 5-7times multiple..

You see, there is absolutely NO LOGIC in the idea that they took apart healthy companies for profit....and the only ones that can say that are those that do not understand things such as....well....what 5-7 times multiple means.

Bottom line....a healthy company is sold for many times its core value....MANY TIMES..

so to take it apart to sell it for its assets...ITS CORE VALUE....is rediculous and a losing proposition.

NO ONE WOULD DO IT!

I think it's funny that people still think Obama is a liberal president. Not if you based it on what he's done in office he's not.

 

[Jarhead]

Dude..first off..I've posted a good many conservatives dislike Obama because of his skin color..not "all". If that's not your reason for not liking..and I am reasonably sure it's not..then my statement never pertained to you.

Second off..I am fully aware of what Bain Capital did and does..even with you sugar coating. And it's not entirely accurate. Most people that got involved with Bain were looking to "maximize" profits..whether or not a company was "healthy".

yo...."dude"....generalizing and saying "most" is sad in itself. Now, If Obama had more conservative policies, trhen I would understand it if cponservatives hated him anyway.

But to say MOST conservatives are against a President who is liberal becuase of his skin color is plain old childish.....

As for Bain...

Please explain to me why a "healthy" company would be taken apart...for a Healthy company is bought for 5-7 times multiple...and NO WAY would assets equal or exceed 5-7times multiple..

You see, there is absolutely NO LOGIC in the idea that they took apart healthy companies for profit....and the only ones that can say that are those that do not understand things such as....well....what 5-7 times multiple means.

Bottom line....a healthy company is sold for many times its core value....MANY TIMES..

so to take it apart to sell it for its assets...ITS CORE VALUE....is rediculous and a losing proposition.

NO ONE WOULD DO IT!

I think it's funny that people still think Obama is a liberal president. Not if you based it on what he's done in office he's not.

Correct....liberal is not the appropriate term fror Obama...

Progressive is.

Progressivism is not a bad thing in my eyes......I just feel that America has a differential BECUSE of its conservative values.

That is my personal opinion.

 

[RDD_1210]

yo...."dude"....generalizing and saying "most" is sad in itself. Now, If Obama had more conservative policies, trhen I would understand it if cponservatives hated him anyway.

But to say MOST conservatives are against a President who is liberal becuase of his skin color is plain old childish.....

As for Bain...

Please explain to me why a "healthy" company would be taken apart...for a Healthy company is bought for 5-7 times multiple...and NO WAY would assets equal or exceed 5-7times multiple..

You see, there is absolutely NO LOGIC in the idea that they took apart healthy companies for profit....and the only ones that can say that are those that do not understand things such as....well....what 5-7 times multiple means.

Bottom line....a healthy company is sold for many times its core value....MANY TIMES..

so to take it apart to sell it for its assets...ITS CORE VALUE....is rediculous and a losing proposition.

NO ONE WOULD DO IT!

I think it's funny that people still think Obama is a liberal president. Not if you based it on what he's done in office he's not.

Correct....liberal is not the appropriate term fror Obama...

Progressive is.

Progressivism is not a bad thing in my eyes......I just feel that America has a differential BECUSE of its conservative values.

That is my personal opinion.

Fair enough. But how are we differentiating between liberal and progressive?